Feedback as a space for academic social practice in doctoral writing groups

ABSTRACT

Objective

While academic writing is considered a core competency in academia, academic writing anxiety is ubiquitous in doctoral student cohorts. Doctoral writing groups provide a space for participants to learn from each other’s writing through the peer feedback process. In this conceptual review, we explore the dialogic nature of the peer feedback process in doctoral writing groups.

Methods

The findings in this study are based on thematic analyses of published peer-reviewed research using standard word processing, annotation, and referencing software.

Results

We focus on how the space of security and trust that is created in doctoral writing groups encourages participants to explore writing as a social practice. Through the relationships built in this type of interactive community, doctoral writing group participants discover and explore the discourses of scholarly communication. Furthermore, doctoral writing groups foster students’ ability to navigate the often-times implicit narratives of academia, thereby building student agency.

Conclusion

We argue, therefore, that feedback in doctoral writing groups should be viewed as a space of academic social practice.

Implications

This study underscores the importance of embedding opportunities for peer-based learning into doctoral programmes not only in the fields of educational and developmental psychology, but also in other disciplines more broadly.

KEY POINTS

(1) Academic writing is an essential skill for PhD graduates.(2) Academic writing anxiety is ubiquitous in PhD student cohorts.(3) Doctoral writing groups provide spaces for PhD students to develop their academic writing.(4) Learning in doctoral writing groups occur through a dialogic peer feedback process.(5) Doctoral writing groups encourage PhD students to see writing as a social practice.(6) Doctoral writing groups foster the agency of PhD students by helping them navigate the implicit narratives of academia.

KEYWORDS:

• Academic writing
• doctoral education
• writing groups
• feedback
• cooperative learning

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Prasadi Hatanwila, Elham Manzari, Pashew Nuri, and Kulsum Chishti Yonzon for helpful discussions during the development of this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Author contributions

Deya Chakraborty, Ali Soyoof, Mehdi Moharami, Ade Dwi Utami, Shaoru Zeng, Ngo Cong-Lem, Danielle Hradsky, Jacky-Lou Maestre, and Elham M. Foomani contributed to the collection, analysis, and synthesis of literature, as well as manuscript preparation, review, and editing. Dr Lynette Pretorius conceptualised the research project, contributed to the collection, analysis, and synthesis of literature, administered and supervised the research project, validated the data analyses, as well as contributed to manuscript preparation, review, and editing.

Additional information

Funding

The authors did not receive any specific grants from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors for the preparation or publication of this conceptual review. Deya Chakraborty received the Monash Graduate Scholarship and the Monash International Tuition Scholarship to support her PhD studies. Ali Soyoof, Mehdi Moharami, Ngo Cong-Lem, Jacky-Lou Maestre, and Elham M. Foomani received the Monash Graduate Scholarship and the Monash International Postgraduate Research Scholarship to support their PhD studies. Ade Dwi Utami received the Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan scholarship to support their PhD studies. Danielle Hradsky received the Raydon Graduate Research Scholarship (also termed the Sam and Nina Narodowski PhD Scholarship) and the Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend to support her PhD studies.